BAILOUT: Say what?

Obama administration to control half the bailout!

P. T. Barnum was right, "There were 47 million suckers born in the USA" ... or something like that! And they're all Republicans.

It's bad enough the Dems will bailout the the automakers (a Dem-union voter stronghold), in Michigan (a Dem-state voter stronghold), and their extended support industries (mostly unionized suppliers and service organizations in the Great Lakes region who traditionally vote Democratic) but to let a Dem President/former community organizer/ACORN buddy/leftist/partisan control 350 billion of the taxpayers money is outrageous.

Aaaaarrrrrggggghhhhh!!!!!

... congressional officials said Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson passed the word over the weekend that he intends to leave $350 billion untouched when the administration leaves office on Jan. 20. That would mean the incoming Obama administration would decide whether and how the funds should be spent. [FOX News]

Tell me something: the bailout money comes from all 57 states, RIGHT? All taxpayers regardless of state, party, amount, ethnicity, religion, and personal sexual orientation, RIGHT? So how come one party and a single industry (one not in the original bailout bill) will have so much coming their way?

I sure hope someone saw this coming and got a watchdog busy monitoring an audit trail?

Fav The CRIB! -- RSS The CRIB!
Google The CRIB! -- Stumble The CRIB!

WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION: American voters will not understand this!

Obama's 95% Illusion: It depends on what the meaning of 'tax cut' is | WSJ Online
HT - Cutting taxes for 95% of Americans | Betsy's Page
HT - Election links - Maggie's Farm

More wealth redistribution coming with a BO win ... 56% of all tax filers would support most of the other 44%! See here too!

All taxes are wealth redistribution by their very nature; money we send to any government entity is a tax, no matter what they call it!

Here's the political catch. All but the clean car credit would be "refundable," which is Washington-speak for the fact that you can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability. In other words, they are an income transfer -- a federal check -- from taxpayers to nontaxpayers.

Once upon a time we called this "welfare," or in George McGovern's 1972 campaign a "Demogrant." Mr. Obama's genius is to call it a tax cut. [...]

Because Mr. Obama's tax credits are phased out as incomes rise, they impose a huge "marginal" tax rate increase on low-income workers. [...]

The tax credits are sold in the name of "making work pay," but in practice they can be a disincentive to working harder, especially if you're a lower-income couple getting raises of $1,000 or $2,000 a year. [WSJ]

This is classic socialism (aka Communism of the 30s to 60s before the poison was relabeled); it will, like all entitlement programs, be a disincentive to honest work.

Election 2008, Obama, Politics,
Socialism, Taxes, Wealth

THE RICH: An answer to a key question only the rich care about!

They Used to Call This Socialism | bt

HT: David Thompson

... if the rich aren’t paying their fair share ... how much tax would “the rich” have to pay before it becomes fair?

Sounds like a good question ... the brain terminal has the answer. If you're a liberal, a relevantist, a democrat, a socialist/communist, a politician, or just a confused fascist, then you for sure don't want to read this.

Another excellent question might be, "What would the government and the entitled do if the rich suddenly lost their wealth?"

And on another note: I've always believed in a flat tax, but now I wonder!

Socialism, Taxes, Wealth